QC Games says it’s ‘winding down internal operations on Breach’

It looks as if Breach is in trouble, folks – or at least the company behind it is. In a message to players today, QC Games announced that it’s “winding down internal operations” on the game.

“Unfortunately, today is the last official day for QC Games, as we begin winding down internal operations on Breach. We’re sure you have a lot of questions about Breach, your accounts, and the future of the game. Our team is still working on defining what this means for Breach and for our community, and we’ll post an updated article soon with answers to as many questions as we can cover.”

Interesting, the company says that while it’s ending sales of the game starting tomorrow, it’s leaving servers the servers up with a promise of “more information soon.”

18

LEAVE A COMMENT

Shame. I actually really enjoyed the game. As others have pointed out devs did not offer enough content.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

1 month ago

Reader

John Mclain

I unfortunately got suckered into it’s early access. The game was incredibly boring, only had 3 freaking levels which were always the same. The class mechanics were bugged/broken half the time and also quite limited in customization despite like 20 classes. Oh and the character appearance options were laughable, you could chose from 4 presets basically.

The clothing options (Where the game would be making it’s money) had maybe two dozen options all of which made you look like some gender confused wacko from final fantasy, but somehow even worse. (Yes somehow someone managed to make clothing that looks worse than Tidus’s clothing from final fantasy X. I kid you not.)

After 20 hours or so you had seen and done EVERYTHING in the game, max character level, max gear, and done every variation of every activity several dozen times. The game had an excellent premise, but the worse execution I’ve seen in several years.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

1 month ago

Reader

IronSalamander8 .

I never played it as I was waiting for it to be out of early access and it sounds like I’m glad I waited! It had some neat ideas but it appears to lack maps and some other features that it would need to succeed.

They put the cart before the horse, focusing on classes instead of actual content to play through first. The game had potential, but the funding was obviously just not there. Shame.

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

1 month ago

Reader

Bruno Brito

with a promise of “more information soon.”

Guess.

You must be logged in to vote2You must be logged in to vote

1 month ago

Reader

ejester

the game wasn’t very good to begin with, but it might’ve gone somewhere… the real issue with this title was the company itself, QC Games are straight up THIEVES.

NOT unhappy at all that they are tanking. Fuck these pricks.

They sold their pre-orders for a game that was going into early access on steam, promising all this stuff, then release the exact same game version (&bonuses), on steam a week after pre-orders end & EA starts… for 30 dollars less. (was technically like $23, but still).

Want your money back? too bad!, QC blames steam & xsolla. ask one of them for your money back. talk to both steam and xsolla, both blame QC, fast forward 2 weeks, after much finger pointing and much blame circle jerking and instead of offering to refund the difference to my CC, or offering in game, CS currency, to make up the loss, etc, etc …

instead, they (QC) delete your account and refund your purchase price. saying this is the only way to reimburse you.’

p.s. wtf are you talking about defiance as a success? they released the exact same fuckin game as they did the first time! and it’s worse now, then it was then. *boggle*

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

1 month ago

Reader

Sorenthaz

Chances are high that it was supposed to be Division (2), not Defiance.

You must be logged in to vote1You must be logged in to vote

1 month ago

Reader

Jeremy Barnes

The game had some serious issues with it’s core system design. It just wasn’t fun.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

1 month ago

Reader

boredlol

I had just looked into Shadow Realms yesterday after the big bioware article mentioned it and that lead me to articles about how Breach was a spiritual successor and passion project … Extra sad to hear when this now :(((

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

1 month ago

Reader

Sorenthaz

It’s strange. It seems like multiple companies including Lionhead and Bioware were trying to do 1v4 asymmetrical ARPG-ish games. Lionhead and Bioware both got those projects axed and Lionhead got shut down (RIP) while the Fable IP was put in development hell (latest game to come out was a digital TCG…). Bioware meanwhile had their thing canned and they focused on ME Andromeda (which bombed) and then Anthem was their last saving grace.

Meanwhile there’s one asymmetrical game that managed to get quite popular, which is Dead By Daylight but it’s a horror-themed survival/chase game rather than an ARPG where someone DMs or plays the villainous role.

It’s a shame because those games did seem promising and that’s what did interest me about Breach. But Breach just didn’t seem to really have enough going for it.

You must be logged in to vote0You must be logged in to vote

1 month ago

Reader

Sorenthaz

Sucks but not really surprised. I didn’t really play enough of the game to get much of an opinion, but from the bits I played it felt like SWL’s combat with a “run between rooms and kill all enemies” format like Phantasy Star Online or Vindictus. Then the main twist seemed to be the asymmetrical 1v4 aspect where someone can be the corruption or evil or whatever it was called, setting up ways to try and impede players’ progress.